[QUOTE="TruestGamer"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]you are right that it was wrong to do but what was the alternative?

releasing the 360 version and not the ps3 version?

holding up the launch until the ps3 version was ready?

just like all of us these devs are on the ragged edge of staying afloat.

they probably literally could not afford to wait until the ps3 version was done.

delta3074

An alternative, would be how they approached Oblivion, as it wasn't realsed simutaneously with the 360 or PC. It was given at least a year. Second alternative, rather than focus on a graphically overhaul, they should have addressed a game breaking bug as priority. It's completely unacceptable. 3rd alternative, why not just release a 360 and PC version and no PS3? It came down to profit and their arrogance in thinking they can shoot out 360 copies to reviewers and sneak by as they have with their other past titles.

They are also not a small company. In fact, they are huge, and even if they were on the "ragged edge", that doesn't justify a pass for them to release product broken products. Other companies would be facing a lawsuit. If this were an ipad or phone, there would have been a recall years ago. Not addressing these issues after a certain amount of time, you cannot possibly blame the difficulty in programming or justifying it by saying, "would you rather not have it?". They released it on the PS3 not as a favor, but for profit. Period.

So they are too small to fix a game breaking bug but can revamp their entire engine? Also, it's hard to imagine that after multiple games consistent with the same issues Skyrim has that the development and testing teams missed it.

Regardless if they are big or small, how does that justify releasing a broken product?

[QUOTE="TruestGamer"]

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]you are right that it was wrong to do but what was the alternative?

releasing the 360 version and not the ps3 version?

holding up the launch until the ps3 version was ready?

just like all of us these devs are on the ragged edge of staying afloat.

they probably literally could not afford to wait until the ps3 version was done.

Riverwolf007

An alternative, would be how they approached Oblivion, as it wasn't realsed simutaneously with the 360 or PC. It was given at least a year. Second alternative, rather than focus on a graphically overhaul, they should have addressed a game breaking bug as priority. It's completely unacceptable. 3rd alternative, why not just release a 360 and PC version and no PS3? It came down to profit and their arrogance in thinking they can shoot out 360 copies to reviewers and sneak by as they have with their other past titles.

They are also not a small company. In fact, they are huge, and even if they were on the "ragged edge", that doesn't justify a pass for them to release product broken products. Other companies would be facing a lawsuit. If this were an ipad or phone, there would have been a recall years ago. Not addressing these issues after a certain amount of time, you cannot possibly blame the difficulty in programming or justifying it by saying, "would you rather not have it?". They released it on the PS3 not as a favor, but for profit. Period.

it is literally a cliche at this point how they go bat**** crazy over things.

guys are breaking down in tearful youtube rants for the last 5 years and people expect them to delay the ps3 version?

it's not going to happen, the ps3 fanbase has painted themselves into a corner on this one and instead of rileing them up i bet the thinking was they were better off hurrying through a patch rather than face the bad publicity of not launching the ps3 version.

[QUOTE="TruestGamer"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

When did I bring up Newell? I think your trying too hard man....

Riverwolf007

releasing the 360 version and not the ps3 version?

holding up the launch until the ps3 version was ready?

just like all of us these devs are on the ragged edge of staying afloat.

they probably literally could not afford to wait until the ps3 version was done.

An alternative, would be how they approached Oblivion, as it wasn't realsed simutaneously with the 360 or PC. It was given at least a year. Second alternative, rather than focus on a graphically overhaul, they should have addressed a game breaking bug as priority. It's completely unacceptable. 3rd alternative, why not just release a 360 and PC version and no PS3? It came down to profit and their arrogance in thinking they can shoot out 360 copies to reviewers and sneak by as they have with their other past titles.

They are also not a small company. In fact, they are huge, and even if they were on the "ragged edge", that doesn't justify a pass for them to release product broken products. Other companies would be facing a lawsuit. If this were an ipad or phone, there would have been a recall years ago. Not addressing these issues after a certain amount of time, you cannot possibly blame the difficulty in programming or justifying it by saying, "would you rather not have it?". They released it on the PS3 not as a favor, but for profit. Period.

[QUOTE="Riverwolf007"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

A few quotes from a few people doesn't mean anything, there are plenty of devs who have no issue with the PS3.

ShadowMoses900

although $$$ i have to $$$$ admit $$$$ later $$$ he did $$$ change $$$ his stance on $$$$ the ps3 $$$ 100%.

When did I bring up Newell? I think your trying too hard man....

[QUOTE="catfishmoon23"]

[QUOTE="GunSmith1_basic"] gamespot didn't. They said the ps3 version had some jittery framerate and pauses, but was pretty much the same as the other versions. Who's wrong??Riverwolf007

This. At the time I arrived at my decision to purchase, all I'd heard was that the 360 version was having troubles streaming textures when installed. I decided I'd go with PS3 version then since FO 3 ran well enough for me on PS3 besides the occasional jitteriness.

Skyrim is quickly becoming downright unplayable. No excuses for this at all.

what reviewer wants that kind of a headache? better to just ignore it and copy paste the 360 review.

[QUOTE="TruestGamer"][QUOTE="musalala"]

I think the main problem is not which one looks better, they look almost identical the problem is that The PS3 version has this game breaking glitch which has even been acknowledged by Bethesda of which I have experienced that makes the game unplayable the longer you play and the larger your file size .I "m tired of posting links just google it and see for yourself. The Official Playstation Magazine Uk has also aknowledged this. With this in mind I would recommend the xbox 360 over the PS3 version any day

Again it has nothing to do with visuals but rather this specific bug which incidently was present in the ps3 version of Fallout 3 and Fallout New vegas, not telling people about this fatal ps3 erro would be fatal.

VanDammFan

So I guess I should just skip this game Ive been waiting for for 2 years? OR play it on my pc?"which I have no desire to do"...looks like im stuck..Guess I'll just get BF3 or MW3 for now..THIS very reason is why this gen sux 10x over..And I like my PS3 but crap I wish Sony would have just stuck to basic architecture instead of using new tech..its just not workingout with multiplats and 3rd party.

[QUOTE="VanDammFan"]

there was a multiplat game that just came out that looked a tad better on PS3. I commented about the 360 fanboys acting like it didnt matter..but it seems to matter any time a 360 multiplat looks a tad better than PS3 version. This is the same case scenario right here. The games look almost identical. Just bump up the contrast on the PS3 version and WALA...We are almost done with this gen of consoles and people still comparing the games and talking crap..lol..move on people,its old news. Go play your games and quit bickering about something thats "in the end" not important one bit..

musalala

I think the main problem is not which one looks better, they look almost identical the problem is that The PS3 version has this game breaking glitch which has even been acknowledged by Bethesda of which I have experienced that makes the game unplayable the longer you play and the larger your file size .I "m tired of posting links just google it and see for yourself. The Official Playstation Magazine Uk has also aknowledged this. With this in mind I would recommend the xbox 360 over the PS3 version any day

Again it has nothing to do with visuals but rather this specific bug which incidently was present in the ps3 version of Fallout 3 and Fallout New vegas, not telling people about this fatal ps3 erro would be fatal.

[QUOTE="da_illest101"]

I'm about 8 hours in, and the only issue that I have is the game freeze for 2 second everytime I give the first attack a monster or someone in a new area. Also the game froze in the first 5 min in a cutscene of all places ( worked 1 min after, for my cuz, he had to restart his ps3. Other than texture dissapering ( that happen the first time I played the game, never happen after) the game run smoothly

Jolt_counter119

It's going to get a lot worse. At about 13hrs for me (about 6500kb) framerate started dipping and there were more glitches. Some quests don't trigger and the snow for me gets really glitchy. And from there it just gets worse.